Live Wire Links

Human Factors

When chess champ Gary Kasparov caved in to a computer called "Deep Blue," people got nervous. Can computers really think? IBM scientists taught Deep Blue intuitive moves to round out its mathematical logic. Can computers now go with their gut?

The answers to these not-so-new questions could change lives. In Kasparov's case, they already have. The rest of us, surging forward on the game board of life, fight the fear that computers might take us as pawns. I doubt we'll lose the match. "Nothing in life is to be feared," said Nobel-winning scientist Marie Curie. "It is only to be understood." Taking a cue from Curie, Live Wire this month samples sizzling ideas about the world's most passionate pairing: that of human and computer.

Its puzzles pique the psychologist and philosopher in all of us --mostly because by examining our relationship with "thinking machines," we learn about our own humanity. How are we the same as them? How are we different? Can we build computers in our likeness...and would we want to? What would Frankenstein author Mary Shelley have to say about this monster we've created? Let's see what's on the minds of experts.

The Three Faces of PCs

In his 1977 book, How You Can Learn to Live with Computers, Harry Kleinberg says we got it all wrong. First, computers aren't thinking machines. They're logical machines, for better and worse. Thinking isn't the issue; it's just that both computers and the human mind can perform logical operations. Kleinberg also notes that computers have more than one face. "It is tempting and easy to approach any modern technology from one side only," he says, "and to decide that it is evil or benevolent, oppressive or uplifting. It is also misleading and unrealistic to do so." An instrument of both control and comedy, speed and obstruction, the computer is a complex thing. Like us. Which leads to...

Mirror, Mirror on the Desktop

MIT professor Sherry Turkle has been called the Margaret Mead of both silicon and cyberspace. For more than 20 years, she's watched how computers shape our sense of self and, in networks, the ways that we relate to one another. In the 1980s, her acclaimed book, The Second Self, showed that we were moving from seeing ourselves as not-animals, or as animals that think, to not-computers, or as machines that feel. That's limiting. Said Turkle in a 1985 interview, "If [you believe that] people are what computers can't do, it puts you at the mercy of what some clever engineer will do tomorrow." More recently, Turkle's Life on the Screen shows how online relationships are more intense than real ones. What I want to know is, why hasn't Oprah picked up on this yet? Why isn't Rikki Lake exposing the many "Men Who Pose As Women Online?"

Well, At Least We Come First

In May, the University of Maryland at College Park hosted a conference held by its Human-Computer Interaction Lab. The very term shows how far the computer has risen in our esteem, equated as a partner in human relationships. At this town/gown swap meet, Live Wire learned how students are solving a problem central to any relationship --communication. In particular, they're fishing for ways to help us hook what we want in the Great Internet Swamp. Better screen designs, sharper search tools, and clearer images of complex data all figured in the work. At the same time, human-computer interactionists (hey! I made that up!) are learning more about how we seek and store information. Who knows --maybe our brains are still evolving, too. Researchers hope their work will help everyone from students preparing papers to scientists studying storm cycles and doctors tracking patient health. Coming from computer science, psychology and library/information services, they make up a SWAT team at the front lines of the frustrating battles between humans and computers.

Sure, But Could It Write Like Fabio?

"Could a computer write the equivalent of Hamlet?" Physicist James Trefil asks the right questions in his new book, Are We Unique? A Scientist Explores the Unparalleled Intelligence of the Human Mind. Trefil, who teaches at our very own George Mason University, argues convincingly and scientifically that when it comes to real human intelligence, ain't nothing like the real thing. We people are definitely one of a kind. And if you don't believe me, ask my clone.

Does It Come In a Petite?

Finally, a June 1 New York Times piece addressed two of Live Wire's pet pre-occupations: color and style. Computer scientist David Gelernter sketched six imaginary PC combos that deviate sharply from today's taupe cubes. Among his whimsical creations: the Deskliner Deluxe, an Art Deco confection with shelves for CDs and books, and the sleekly attractive Rosebud, a fold-up model that you tote from room to room. Gelernter says we're too passive about computer design, accepting gawky components and lumbering software that neither look good nor feel right. "Upgrading esthetics," he observes, "usually upgrades function too." Alas, when it comes to PCs, we can now take them anywhere -- but we can't dress them up.

Clearly, whether it comes to style, smarts, simplicity or selfhood, computers provoke much ado about something. What that is, we're not quite sure. Until we do, the advice can be this: know thyself, know thy computer and, above all, know that thee can pull the plug.

| home | expertise | about us | testimonials | computer columns | contact |